Technical Brief

Synthetic Jet Actuator Cavity Acoustics: Helmholtz Versus Quarter-Wave Resonance

[+] Author and Article Information
Tyler Van Buren

Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering,
Princeton University,
Princeton, NJ 08544

Edward Whalen

Boeing Research and Technology,
Hazelwood, MO 63042

Michael Amitay

Mechanical Aerospace and Nuclear Engineering,
Center for Flow Physics and Control,
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,
Troy, NY 12180

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Noise Control and Acoustics Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF VIBRATION AND ACOUSTICS. Manuscript received September 25, 2014; final manuscript received February 20, 2015; published online April 27, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Theodore Farabee.

J. Vib. Acoust 137(5), 054501 (Oct 01, 2015) (5 pages) Paper No: VIB-14-1358; doi: 10.1115/1.4030216 History: Received September 25, 2014; Revised February 20, 2015; Online April 27, 2015

The impact of cavity geometry on the source of acoustic resonance (Helmholtz or quarter-wave) for synthetic jet type cavities is presented. The cavity resonance was measured through externally excited microphone measurements. It was found that, for pancake-shaped cavities, the Helmholtz resonance equation was inadequate (off by more than 130%) at predicting the acoustic cavity resonances associated with synthetic jet actuation, whereas a two-dimensional quarter-wave resonance was accurate to 15%. The changes in the geometry (cavity diameter, cavity height, and orifice length) could alter the cavity resonance by up to 50%, and a finite element solver was accurate at predicting this resonance in all cases. With better knowledge of the phenomena governing the acoustic resonance, prediction of the cavity resonance can become more accurate and improvements to current prediction tools can be made.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Glezer, A., and Amitay, M., 2002, “Synthetic Jets,” Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 34(1), pp. 503–529. [CrossRef]
Chen, F. J., Yao, C., Beele, G. B., Bryant, R. G., and Fox, R. L., 2000, “Development of Synthetic Jet Actuators for Active Flow Control at NASA Langley,” AIAA Paper No. 2000-2405. [CrossRef]
Ugrina, S., and Flatau, A., 2004, “Investigation of Synthetic Jet Actuator Design Parameters,” Proc. SPIE, 5390, pp. 284–296. [CrossRef]
Gomes, L., Crowther, W., and Wood, N., 2006, “Towards a Practical Piezoceramic Diaphragm Based Synthetic Jet Actuator for High Subsonic Applications: Effect of Chamber and Orifice Depth on Actuator Peak Velocity,” AIAA Paper No. 2006-2859. [CrossRef]
Gomes, L., 2009, “On the Modelling of Anisotropic Piezoelectric Diaphragms for the Development of High Subsonic Synthetic Jet Actuators,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Van Buren, T., 2013, “Synthetic Jet Actuator Development and in Depth Exploration,” Ph.D. thesis, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York.
Helmholtz, H., 1875, The Sensations of Tone as a Physiological Basis for the Theory of Music, Longsmans, Green and Co., New York.
Gallas, Q., Holman, R., Nishida, T., Carroll, B., Sheplak, M., and Cattafesta, L., 2003, “Lumped Element Modeling of Piezoelectric-Driven Synthetic Jet Actuators,” AIAA J., 41(2), pp. 240–247. [CrossRef]
Tang, H., and Zhong, S., 2009, “Lumped Element Modeling of Synthetic Jet Actuators,” Aerosp. Sci. Technol., 13(6), pp. 331–339. [CrossRef]
Holman, R., Utturkar, Y., Mittal, R., Smith, B., and Cattafesta, L., 2005, “Formation Criterion for Synthetic Jets,” AIAA J., 43(10), pp. 2110–2115. [CrossRef]
Pavlova, A., and Amitay, M., 2006, “Electronic Cooling Using Synthetic Jet Impingement,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 128(9), pp. 897–907. [CrossRef]
Lockerby, D. A., and Carpenter, P. W., 2007, “Is Helmholtz Resonance a Problem for Micro-Jet Actuators,” Flow Turbul. Combust., 78(3–4), pp. 205–222. [CrossRef]
Persoons, T., and O’Donovan, T. S., 2007, “A Pressure-Based Estimate of Synthetic Jet Velocity,” Phys. Fluids, 19(12), p. 128104. [CrossRef]
Sharma, R. N., 2007, “Fluid Dynamics-Based Analytical Model for Synthetic Jet Actuation,” AIAA J., 45(8), pp. 1841–1847. [CrossRef]
Chaudhari, M., Verma, G., Puranik, B., and Agrawal, A., 2009, “Frequency Response of a Synthetic Jet Cavity,” Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., 33(3), pp. 439–448. [CrossRef]
Bhapkar, U. S., Srivastava, A., and Agrawal, A., 2013, “Acoustic and Heat Transfer Aspects of an Inclined Impinging Synthetic Jet,” Int. J. Therm. Sci., 74, pp. 145–155. [CrossRef]
Bhapkar, U. S., Srivastava, A., and Agrawal, A., 2014, “Acoustic and Heat Transfer Characteristics of an Impinging Elliptical Synthetic Jet Generated by Acoustic Actuator,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 79, pp. 12–23. [CrossRef]
Harris, C. M., and Feshbach, H., 1950, “On the Acoustics of Coupled Rooms,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 22(5), pp. 572–578. [CrossRef]
Kuttruff, H., 2009, Room Acoustics, Spon Press, Abingdon, UK.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Volume of fluid inside an ideal Helmholtz resonator (a) and a representative pancake-shape cavity (b) used in the experiments

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematics of the SJA apparatus with common dimensions labeled. Two microphones (one inside and outside of the cavity) measured the output of an external speaker (not to scale).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Power spectral density of the microphones inside and outside of the cavity as they vary with frequency for apparatus A (a) with geometry: dc = 40 mm, hc = 1 mm, hn = 3 mm, lo = 6 mm, ho = 1 mm, and apparatus B (b) with geometry: dc = 80 mm, hc = 3 mm, hn = 3 mm, lo = 12 mm, ho = 1 mm. The peak of the inner and outer ratio, which is the cavity resonance, is marked with a dashed (apparatus A) and solid (apparatus B) line. SJA performance compared with cavity resonance results superimposed (dashed and solid lines) for the same cavity geometries. Taken from Van Buren [6], Fig. 3.28.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Differential pressure distribution of the first resonance mode different orifice lengths (a–c) and cavity heights (d–f). For the varying orifice length cases, lo = 3 mm (a), 9 mm (b), and 15 mm (c), at hn = 3 mm, ho = 1 mm, hc = 3 mm, and dc = 80 mm. For the varying cavity height cases, hc = 2 mm (d), 6 mm (e), and 10 mm (f) at hn = 3 mm, ho = 1 mm, lo = 12 mm, and dc = 80 mm.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

The variation of the cavity resonance frequency with orifice length. Experimental results (symbols), acoustics FEM simulation (black lines), quarter-wave resonance (dark gray lines), and the Helmholtz resonance prediction (light gray lines) for a selected geometry of apparatus A: hc = 1 mm, hn = 2 mm, and apparatus B: hc = 3 mm, hn = 2 mm are presented.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Change in normalized cavity resonance frequency with orifice half-length and cavity height for apparatus A (a) and B (b) with common neck lengths of hn = 3 mm and orifice widths ho = 1 mm. The surface shade depicts ratio of measured frequency, fcav to Helmholtz, fH. Note that apparatus A and B are presented on different scales of hc/ho and lo/ho due to a limited range of available geometries.



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In